Debt collection is not merely a private relationship between debtor and creditor; it is also a critical area of law for the security of commercial life, the preservation of contractual discipline, and economic predictability. According to data from the National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP), as of 24.06.2026 there were 25,389,062 pending files before enforcement offices, strikingly demonstrating the intensity the enforcement system has reached.
The fact that the number of incoming files is approximately 20,000 per day shows that this workload is not static, but continuously growing. Moreover, these figures refer only to disputes reflected in enforcement offices; receivables that are never made subject to enforcement proceedings because they are considered uncollectible remain outside this picture.
What Does a Pending Enforcement File Mean?
In enforcement law, a “pending file” refers to an enforcement file opened before an enforcement office that has not yet been fully concluded. This may be a proceeding in which a payment order has been sent but payment has not been made, or it may be a proceeding awaiting attachment, sale, objection, complaint, or collection.
Pendency does not necessarily mean that the file is actively progressing. In practice, while some files are processed regularly, others may remain pending for a long time due to reasons such as the inability to identify the debtor’s assets, address issues, objection processes, or the absence of a determined enforcement strategy.
For this reason, the high number of pending files indicates not only the workload of enforcement offices, but also the practical difficulties encountered in debt collection. Creditors in particular should not be content merely with opening a file; they must follow the process both legally and in practice.
Why Are Receivables Not Reflected in Enforcement Proceedings Important?
The files visible in UYAP data cover only receivables that have been converted into enforcement proceedings. In practice, however, many individuals and businesses may never make their receivables subject to enforcement proceedings on the assumption that “I will not be able to collect it anyway.”
The approach of “I will not be able to collect it anyway” may cause the creditor to give up exercising legal rights and suffer greater losses over time.
The reasons behind this approach generally include the following:
- The belief that the debtor lacks the ability to pay,
- Concern that enforcement costs will exceed the receivable,
- The expectation that the proceedings will take a long time,
- The view that the debtor’s assets cannot be identified,
- The receivable not being documented or being difficult to prove.
However, these reasons do not justify abandoning enforcement in every case. The nature of the receivable, the debtor’s situation, the risk of limitation, the available documents, and collectability must be assessed together.
The First Question for Creditors: Has the Correct Type of Proceeding Been Chosen?
Success in enforcement proceedings often depends on the strategy determined on the day the proceeding is initiated. Depending on the type of receivable, different routes may come into play, such as enforcement proceedings without judgment, judgment enforcement, proceedings specific to negotiable instruments, or enforcement through realization of pledged collateral.
Choosing the wrong enforcement route may increase the debtor’s opportunities to object, prolong the process, and cause unnecessary expense. Therefore, it is important for creditors to assess the following points in particular before initiating proceedings:
- Is the receivable based on a written document?
- Is the receivable tied to a court judgment or a document having the force of a judgment?
- Is there a negotiable instrument such as a cheque, promissory note, or bill of exchange?
- Is the debtor a natural person or a company?
- Does the debtor have known assets or commercial activity?
- Is there a risk of limitation or a preclusive time limit?
The answers to these questions directly affect the enforcement route and the collection strategy to be followed.
Consequences of Enforcement Proceedings for Debtors
The high number of enforcement files concerns not only creditors, but also debtors. If a debtor against whom proceedings have been initiated does not object to the payment order within the prescribed period, the proceeding may become final. Finalization of the proceeding may then pave the way for attachment procedures.
One of the most common mistakes made by debtors is failing to take the payment order seriously or missing the deadline. Yet in enforcement law, time limits are generally short and their consequences are severe. Objections concerning the debt, signature, jurisdiction, or interest must be raised within the periods prescribed by the relevant legislation and in accordance with procedure.
At the same time, a debtor should not remain entirely passive even in a file where the debt is genuinely owed. Installment arrangements, payment protocols, restructuring of the debt, or negotiations to close the file may, under appropriate conditions, lead to more economical outcomes for the parties.
Why Is Documentation Vital in the Face of Enforcement Congestion?
In an environment where the number of pending files is this high, the nature of the document held by the creditor becomes even more important. Records such as contracts, invoices, current account reconciliations, delivery documents, payment plans, suretyship declarations, or promissory notes may determine the direction of the enforcement process.
Relying solely on trust in commercial relationships may create serious evidentiary problems at the collection stage. Especially for companies, a proper contractual infrastructure and written documentation system are of fundamental importance for the receivable to be pursued quickly and effectively in the enforcement process.
In practice, the main points creditors should pay attention to are as follows:
- Contracts should be prepared in written and signed form,
- Records relating to delivery and performance of services should be retained,
- Current account reconciliations should be carried out regularly,
- Due dates should be clearly determined,
- Security such as collateral, suretyship, or promissory notes should be obtained in compliance with the law,
- Prompt action should be taken in the event of payment delays.
“Opening a File” Is Not a Collection Strategy by Itself
Initiating enforcement proceedings is an important step in debt collection; however, it is not sufficient on its own. The effectiveness of the process is determined by steps such as the finalization of the proceeding, investigation of the debtor’s assets, timely submission of attachment requests, and, where necessary, recourse to the lifting or annulment of objections.
Due to the high number of files, monitoring procedures before enforcement offices also carries separate importance. Leaving the file passive may reduce the likelihood of collection. For this reason, creditors should establish a regular follow-up plan on a file-by-file basis, conduct a cost-benefit assessment, and support the legal process with documents.
In addition, the same method is not suitable for every receivable. In some files, a strategy of rapid attachment and sale may come to the forefront, while in others, entering into a protocol with the debtor may be more efficient. The determining factors here are the amount of the receivable, the debtor’s situation, and the legal risks.
What Does This Mean in Practice?
More than 25 million pending enforcement files and an intake of approximately 20,000 new files per day point to a picture in which delay in debt collection increases the cost. Both creditors and debtors should treat enforcement processes not merely as a technical procedure, but as a process that gives rise to serious legal consequences.
- Creditors should assess the documentation of the receivable, the enforcement route, and collectability together before initiating proceedings.
- Debtors should obtain legal support without missing deadlines when they receive a payment order or enforcement notification.
- Companies should establish their contract and documentation systems in a way that reduces collection risks.
- Passive waiting often lowers the likelihood of collecting the receivable; files must be followed up regularly.
- Enforcement proceedings, when properly planned, are not only a means of collection but also an important part of commercial risk management.